Print Friendly, PDF & Email

19 SEPTEMBER, 2017 (MAINS)

TODAYS ANSWER WRITING CHALLENGE FROM PHILOSOPHY PAPER – 1 – PART B

Q1. Evaluate Prabhakar Mimamsaka’s arguments for accepting sruti as pramana. (2013/12 ½)

Please write the answer in comments section

  • jaish

    Mimamsa pays the greatest attention to the ‘Sruti’ as pramana because it has to justify the authority of the Vedas. Sruti knowledge is the vedic knowledge. As per Mimamsha, Vedas are eternal and impersona in origin and hence they are free from all possible mistakes due to human weakness and they are unchangeable and infallible in nature.
    Prabhakara admits only vedic testimony as the real testimony and reduces the human testimony to inference because its validity is inferred from the trustworthy character of the person. While, Kumarila has accepted both vedic testimony as well as human testimony. As per prabhakara, vedic testimony is valid in itself.
    Analysis:
    It is accepted by the nyayikas that Vedas are spoken by the God and they are eternal in nature while Prabhakara has accepted Vedas as eternal but authorless.
    It is also the fact that Prabhakara has not accepted the human testimony then it is how to accept his arguments to accept the infallibility of Vedas, which is given by him.
    Carvaka, the materialistic philosopher has accepted the Vedas as the production of some cunning section of the society for their livelihood.
    In the end, we can say the Prabhakara has accepted the Sruti as pramana to justify the importance of Vedas.